3 Blackwater guards sentenced to 30 years in prison, 1 sentenced to life

4 employees of the security company were convicted after 14 left dead in Baghdad

Former Blackwater employees Evan Liberty, left, and Nicholas Slatten are shown in a file photo. A years-long legal fight over a deadly mass shooting of civilians in an Iraq war zone reaches its reckoning point, when four former security guards are sentenced for the rampage. (The Associated Press)

A federal judge sentenced one former Blackwater security guard to life in prison and three others to 30-year terms for their roles in a 2007 shooting that killed 14 Iraqi civilians and wounded 17 others.

The carnage in Baghdad's Nisoor Square caused an international uproar over the use of private security guards in a war zone.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced Nicholas Slatten, who witnesses said was the first to fire shots in the incident, to life on a charge of first-degree murder. The three other guards — Paul Slough, Evan Liberty and Dustin Heard — were each sentenced to 30 years and one day in prison for charges that included manslaughter, attempted manslaughter and using firearms while committing a felony.

In their first public statements since the shooting, the former contractors — appearing in leg shackles and prison garb — insisted they are innocent.

"I cannot say in all honesty to the court that I did anything wrong," Heard told the judge.

Defence argued for mercy

Lamberth announced the sentences after a daylong hearing at which defense lawyers had argued for leniency and presented character witnesses for their clients, and prosecutors asked that those sentences — the minimums mandatory under the law — be made even harsher. He rejected both requests.

"Based on the seriousness of the crimes, I find the penalty is not excessive," Lamberth said.

All four were convicted in October for their involvement in the killings in the crowded traffic circle in downtown Baghdad. The legal fight over the killings has spanned years.

Prosecutors described the shooting as an unprovoked ambush of civilians and said the men haven't shown remorse or taken responsibility. Defense lawyers countered that the men were targeted with gunfire and shot back in self-defense.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Martin urged the court to consider the gravity of the crime as well as the sheer number of dead and wounded and "count every victim."

"These four men have refused to accept virtually any responsibility for their crimes and the blood they shed that day," Martin said.

Video monitors in the courtroom showed photos of the dead and wounded, as well as images of cars that were riddled with bullets or blown up with grenade launchers fired by the Blackwater guards.

These four men have refused to accept virtually any responsibility for their crimes and the blood they shed that day.- Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Martin

The defence argued for mercy, saying decades-long sentences would be unconstitutionally harsh for men who operated in a stressful, war-torn environment and who have proud military careers and close family ties. They also argued the guards were using weapons that had been issued by the U.S. State Department for their protection.

"The punishment should be within the limits of civilized standards," defense attorney David Schertler said.

But Lamberth said he would not deviate from the mandatory minimum sentences, noting that similar stiff penalties have been applied to police officers who commit crimes while carrying automatic weapons as part of their jobs.

Mohammad Kinani Al-Razzaq spoke in halting English about the death of his 9-year-old son as a picture of the smiling boy, Ali Mohammed Hafedh Abdul Razzaq, was shown on courtroom monitors.

"What's the difference between these criminals and terrorists?" Razzaq said.

The sentencing was unlikely to bring an end to the legal wrangling, which began even before the guards were first charged in 2008. A judge later dismissed the case before trial, but a federal appeals court revived it and the guards were indicted again in October 2013.

Even before the trial began, defense lawyers had identified multiple issues as likely forming the basis of an appeal, including whether there was proper legal jurisdiction to charge the defendants in the first place.

To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to CBC/Radio-Canada's online communities (except in children and youth-oriented communities). Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted.

By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses. Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.

Note: The CBC does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comments, you acknowledge that CBC has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Please note that comments are moderated and published according to our submission guidelines.